Summary of Research Findings

Firstly, according to the results of learning motivation questionnaire, the high-achievers had a significant improvement (t = 2.38; p < .05) in their learning motivation, and so did the low-achievers (t = 3.77; p < .05); however, the middle-achievers only had a slight improvement (t = 2.10; p > .05), and there was no significant difference between their pretest and posttest. Although the ten weeks TBLT course plan didn’t ideally make all of the students improve their learning motivation in the questionnaire, it still had a positive impact on their learning motivation.

Secondly, there were three main problems and obstacles challenged the instructor.

First, there was the great difference between students’ English competence, and it resulted in some students (i.e. the high-achievers and middle-achievers) did the tasks by themselves but some students (i.e. the low-achievers) were confused about what to do. Second, students focused on finishing their tasks, so they didn’t use English but mother tongue in their group discussion. Third, students had the difficulty in English presentation, and most of the reporters were the high-achievers.

With the obstacles mentioned above, the instructors used some strategies to overcome these difficulties, such as offering the background knowledge related to the tasks, offering the tasks with different difficulty based on students’ English competence, requiring students to cooperate with each other, encouraging students to speak English as much as they could,

"#!

making all of the students have the opportunity to report in English and go on the stage.

During this action plan, instructor had some growths on the classroom management, time management, and the TBLT skills. Moreover, based on the reflective journals, TBLT had the positive influence on students’ learning engagement (i.e. learning motivation) and developing their teamwork.

Thirdly, based on the data of course feedback sheet and interview, the students in the present study had positive attitudes towards TBLT. They considered the tasks were challenge and interesting, and they liked to learn English through group discussion. After the TBLT course plan, they became more confidence in their English competence and had high learning motivation in English learning.

Fourthly, according to the classroom observation, observers (i.e. the homeroom teacher and the English teacher) pointed out the advantages and the difficulties of implementing TBLT. They considered TBLT could improve students’ learning motivation and make all of the students get involved in the class. Due to the tasks in the action plan provided the connection with students’ life experience and interested them, students were willing to carry out the tasks and practice English. However, there were two main issues of implementing TBLT. First, students liked to do the tasks, but there were only a few target language productions in their task discussion. Second, some of the students were in charge of all the tasks, but some had nothing to do; in other words, they were lack of teamwork.

On the basis of the above issues, observers offered some suggestions towards TBLT implementation. First, design more tasks requiring students to use English in their group discussion and report on the stage, and encourage them speak English as much as they could.

Second, shorten the time of doing task (i.e. the task stage) and increase the rehearsing time (i.e. the planning stage), and then students’ target language production might increase. Finally, set up clear rules and carry them out exactly, and then students’ could more focus on English learning and help each other.

5.2 Discussions

In this study, the TBLT action plan was employed to improve students’ learning motivation and to explore the attitudes towards TBLT implementation from the instructor’s, students’, and observers’ perspectives. Based on the results, learning motivation, difficulties and suggestions of implementing TBLT were discussed in this section.

"#!

5.2.1 Learning Motivation

In regard to learning motivation, the instructor and observers all considered that TBLT improved students’ motivation in English learning. The results indicated that TBLT could bring students’ interests, and the tasks provided students challenge and related to their life experience; therefore, the moment students finished their tasks, they felt confident and achieved satisfaction. Also, this result echoed Keller’s ARCS model (Keller, 2000) and Crookes and Schmidt’ assertion (as cited in Dörnyei, 1994) that ARCS model could be integrated into TBLT and improve students’ English learning motivation.

During the action plan, students were eager to finish their tasks and strived to seek solutions when encountering the difficulties. It indicated that students’ perception of task difficulty and the probability of getting success achieved balance; namely, students believed that their efforts could achieve success. This finding echoed Expectancy-value theory that students’ perception of the task and their own competence decided their learning motivation (Eccles, 1983; McKeachie, Pintrich, Lin, & Smith, 1987) Moreover, students were happy to engage in English learning, group learning, and liked the student-centered classroom. This echoed Situated Motivation Theory that choice, challenge, control, and could promote students’ motivated beliefs and behaviors (Paris & Turner, 1994).

In this study, most of the students considered their English competence could be improved through TBLT. From the finding we could reasonably infer students’ expectancy of success, goal orientation and affection towards the task developed their cognitive, metacognitive, and resource management strategy. It was consistent with Pintrich’s Motivated Learning Strategy (Pintrich, 1999; Pintrich & De Groot, 1990; Zimmerman &

Martinez-Pons, 1986, 1988) that learning motivation had positive influence on self-regulated learning; in other words, students’ learning motivation and self-regulated learning both increased after the TBLT action plan.

In addition, the researcher neither used outer rewards nor implemented English tests, but students still made effort to carry out their tasks and took notes during the language focus phase. The results indicated that TBLT successfully developed students’ integrative and intrinsic motivation towards English learning.

Based on the results of learning motivation questionnaire, middle-achievers’ learning motivation didn’t reach the significant improvement after the TBLT action plan, i.e. high- and low-achievers’ learning motivation had the significant improvement, but middle-achievers’ didn’t. Compared with the qualitative data, high- and low-achievers attributed

"#!

their successful experience of task performance to their ability and effort, but middle-achievers took neutral attitudes towards every aspect. This result showed that high- and low-achievers build up positive attribution system but middle-low-achievers didn’t. When exploring the reason further, middle-achievers didn’t have any preference in English learning but had neutral attribution. Hence, TBLT couldn’t significantly improve middle-achievers’ learning motivation but increase high- and low-achievers’ learning motivation.

5.2.2 The Difficulties and Suggestions of Implementing TBLT

During the ten weeks TBLT action plan, the researcher came across many obstacles, and the observers also pointed out the difficulties in the implementation of TBLT. The researcher would display two main issues and some suggestions as below.

To begin with, students worked hard at carrying out tasks, but most of them used mother tongue rather than English; hence, it also resulted in the target language production issue. This result could be inferred that speaking Chinese offered more clear understanding in group discussion and students’ limited English competence; also, it’s consistent with Hung’s (2012) and Carless’ (2004) findings that students couldn’t help but using mother tongue due to the clear expression and the limited target language ability. Based on the mother tongue use and target language production issues, the instructor and observers provided suggestions to deal with these difficulties. They suggested designing more tasks in communicating in English, offering the essential background knowledge and linguistic items related to tasks, offering friendly classroom atmosphere to encourage students to speak English as much as possible, and then building up students’ confidence in English by praising their advantages of each performance.

In addition, for the purpose of involving all students in their task rather than chatting (Willis, 1996), the researcher provided limited time for them to carry out their tasks.

However, time limitation not only caused students didn’t have sufficient time to rehearse their oral report but also caused most of the reporters were high-achievers (i.e. lack of teamwork). Hence, the researcher lengthened the task phase. But this resulted in another issue:

students put most of their time and effort at task stage rather than planning stage, i.e. they still had insufficient preparation for their oral report. Based on the results, observers provided their suggestions to deal with these difficulties. First, set up the rules beforehand, then inform students clearly and carry out exactly. Second, suggest students put more effort at rehearsing their report and make sure they have sufficient preparation. Once students follow the rules, they will have a good discipline in class and build up their metacognitive in report. That is to

"#!

say, students will understand making a good presentation required their well preparation and teamwork.